Kemboy Law Advocates v Narok County Government (Environment and Land Miscellaneous Application E017 of 2023) [2025] KEELC 8245 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Environment and Land Court threw out a Ksh 10 million legal fee award against Narok County, ruling taxing officers must justify big fees with real reasons.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the Reference was filed out of time under Para 11(1) & (2) of the Advocates Remuneration Order
The Preliminary Objection failed; time ran from receipt of the certified ruling and written reasons, so the Reference filed 8 days later was within the 14-day period.
The ruling was delivered 18th December 2024 and the certified copy with written reasons was supplied on 22nd January 2025. The Reference filed on 30th January 2025 was 8 days after receipt. The court held that Para 11(1) provides for requesting written reasons, and that was the procedure the Client followed; upload on the CTS portal did not defeat this. The objection was a pure point of law within the Mukisa Biscuits definition but was not merited.
Whether the taxing officer erred in principle in awarding instruction fees of Ksh 10,000,000/= and the 50% increase
The instruction fees were manifestly excessive; the taxing officer failed to give elaborate reasons or attach the general considerations to the specific case, warranting interference.
The taxing officer relied on general considerations - importance, nature, interest of parties, duration, weight and labour - without detailing the specific complexity, research, skill or responsibility borne. The suit was still ongoing and the value of the subject matter unascertainable, yet no reasons were given for settling at Ksh 10,000,000/= out of the Ksh 20,000,000/= sought. Following Kamunyori and Ex-parte Muchiri W'Njuguna, manifest excessiveness justifies an inference of error of principle. The 50% increase was not itself faulted per Dennis KN Magare, but falls away as the award was set aside.
Whether the court should decide the contested items for service and attendance
The court declined to determine the service and attendance items at this stage, leaving them to the taxing officer on re-taxation.
Having found the instruction fees manifestly high, the court considered it appropriate not to determine the other items for service and attendance, but to remit the entire Bill of Costs for re-taxation before a different taxing officer so the assessment can be made afresh on the laid-down principles.
Legal principles established
#- A court may interfere with a taxing officer's decision where the fee awarded is manifestly excessive or based on an error of principle, including failure to give reasons for the instruction fee awarded.
- Where the taxing officer does not detail the complexity, weight, care, research or skill deployed to justify instruction fees, the award cannot stand.
- Compliance with Para 11(1) & (2) of the Advocates Remuneration Order is measured from receipt of the written reasons, and requesting written reasons is the correct procedure for starting time running.
Court orders
#- 1.Dismissal of the Notice of Preliminary Objection dated 9th May 2025, with costs to the Client/Applicant
- 2.Setting aside of the taxing master's Ruling of 18th December 2024 taxing the Bill of Costs at Ksh 17,972,416.50
- 3.Allowance of the Chamber Summons Application dated 30th January 2025 in terms of prayers No. 1 and 2
- 4.Direction that the Bill of Costs dated 4th October 2023 be placed before another taxing officer other than Hon Daniel Ngayo for re-taxation and assessment of costs based on the laid down principles
- 5.Each party to bear their own costs of the Chamber Summons Application
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Paragraph 11(2) of the Advocates Remuneration Order 2014
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Kemboy Law Advocates v Narok County Government (Environment and Land Miscellaneous Application E017 of 2023) [2025] KEELC 8245 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Chamber Summons Application dated 30th January 2025 (Narok ELC No. 34 of 2019, Formerly Nairobi HCCC No. 1248 of 2003). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/8245/eng@2025-11-27
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.